First moves and getting those huts.

[sampsa]

From reading through above posts BW first appears stronger but maybe not so obviously stronger that your're going to convince TruePurple to change hir gameplay.

Nothing is obviously stronger if we cherry pick just one factor, say short term and evaluate positions based on that one factor. It takes some experience to know what position is better than another - so it seems very likely you are correct.

 

[TruePurple]

Indeed there is no consistant metric, even a combination of metrics, for deciding which is better, and to something like turn 32 is too little for the variables to iron out. For example the version where you do the mine first is running at a significant income deficit. So you can't say it's catching up on research when you can only research at that speed for like 4 more turns. Similarly you can't say "ohh a second worker, you can never catch up to a early second worker!", especially when "catch up" is so vague.

 

[sampsa]

For example the version where you do the mine first is running at a significant income deficit.

But as has been explained numerous times, more cities working strong tiles allows you to catch up this "deficit".

Similarly you can't say "ohh a second worker, you can never catch up to a early second worker!", especially when "catch up" is so vague.

But as has been explained numerous times, starting with fishing never catches up -wise, because early -burst allows you to expand much faster, which leads gains in all three: .

What exactly it is that needs to be less vague? If the results of your tests don't match the obvious, consider the possibility that your play can be improved.

I'm also sure you have improved tremendously thanks to this thread - when I saw your first save I assumed it's on noble at most.

 

[antimony]

Indeed there is no consistant metric, even a combination of metrics, for deciding which is better, and to something like turn 32 is too little for the variables to iron out. For example the version where you do the mine first is running at a significant income deficit. So you can't say it's catching up on research when you can only research at that speed for like 4 more turns. Similarly you can't say "ohh a second worker, you can never catch up to a early second worker!", especially when "catch up" is so vague.

Are you talking about my T32 save with a 1 gold deficit each turn? When I said 8 or 10 gold spent that was over that many turns at 1 gold spent per turn.

 

[TruePurple]

Are you talking about my T32 save with a 1 gold deficit each turn? When I said 8 or 10 gold spent that was over that many turns at 1 gold spent per turn.

My mistake, I was looking at a different screenshot. When you say "worker settler" you meant BW - Fishing as well?

 

[antimony]

My mistake, I was looking at a different screenshot. When you say "worker settler" you meant BW - Fishing as well?

Yes, post #99 in this thread is worker-settler and also BW-Fishing. Post #102 is workboat-worker, and also Fishing-BW. On the T32 screenshots you can see the research per turn and gold per turn. The only thing that was missing was the cumulative tech progress to compare between the two. So that last piece of information is in my post #117 in reply to your request.

 

[TruePurple]

Yes, post #99 in this thread is worker-settler and also BW-Fishing. Post #102 is workboat-worker, and also Fishing-BW. On the T32 screenshots you can see the research per turn and gold per turn. The only thing that was missing was the cumulative tech progress to compare between the two. So that last piece of information is in my post #117 in reply to your request.

Did you make one worker or two with either?

 

[TruePurple]

But as has been explained numerous times, starting with fishing never catches up -wise, because early -burst allows you to expand much faster, which leads gains in all three: .

You are contradicting yourself. This is over-simplistic. "Not catching up" with chopping would only be a thing if we had endless forests to chop.

If the goal is to have more food, commerce and production earlier, a second city should be made before a second worker.

 

[sampsa]

You are contradicting yourself.

How? Maybe I can explain it better.

This is over-simplistic.

Do you want to make it more complicated? How and why?

"Not catching up" with chopping would only be a thing if we had endless forests to chop.

We went through this already. It doesn't matter if the workers aren't chopping endlessly, and nobody besides you has claimed that is what the workers do. Look at my screenshot. That is a reasonable amount of chopping. You won't catch up if you chop them later, because expanding faster wins .

 

[antimony]

Did you make one worker or two with either?

Only one worker in both cases on turn 32.

After that, when we were talking about what are the next steps after city 2, I mentioned maybe building the 2nd worker before city 3, that was the discussion on posts #104-105, etc.

 

[TruePurple]

Do you want to make it more complicated? How and why?

Closer in complication to actual game. Besides, you said something similar yourself. Moderator Action: *SNIP* This is unnecessary and it is flaming. Please be nice to folks who are trying to help you improve your game. - lymond

If it is about expanding fast, then logically whatever method produces 3 cities in same placement earliest is best.

How often do people prechop before city placement? How much prechop production usually makes it worth it for you?

 

[sampsa]

Closer in complication to actual game. Besides, you said something similar yourself. *SNIP* (moderated text)

I don't understand what you are talking about. There is nothing intellectually dishonest, I am being 100% honest. We are still waiting for your save, probably in vain.

If it is about expanding fast, then logically whatever method produces 3 cities in same placement earliest is best.

I'm not saying that, exactly. I'm saying that your aim in the early game should be to expand to good cities that are working good tiles as fast as you can. I am not able to say it any clearer than that.

How often do people prechop before city placement? How much prechop production usually makes it worth it for you?

What does "city placement" mean? Do you know what prechopping is? It is chopping and not finishing the chop.

If you mean chopping the forest that would be destroyed when settling, I did it in this game. Indians have that luxury. Settles 1T faster and was what 12?

 

[TruePurple]

I'm not saying that, exactly.

I am saying that using your logic that we should do that. Your logic means we should get at least initial cities ASAP.

If you mean chopping the forest that would be destroyed when settling, I did it in this game. Indians have that luxury. Settles 1T faster and was what 12?

Yes that is what I meant.

 

[sampsa]

I am saying that using your logic that we should do that. Your logic means we should get at least initial cities ASAP.

And I just told you what my actual thinking is. You don't get to tell me what I say/think or what my logic is.

Never mind this conversation

Cheers and GL!

 

[antimony]

@TurnPurple

Ok I'm sorry if this is feeling redundant but I would rather just list all the similarities and differences between my two turn 32 saves here, to avoid more posts about this:

Spoiler :

Let's just call fishing first F and bronze first (also worker-settler first) B.

- Same units on the map on turn 32 (1 worker and warrior we started with). The workers are even on the same spot (not intentional, I swear).
- Same 3 improved tiles in the capital (clams, clams, pig mine).

Differences:

- Population/growth: Capital in B has 2 pop, growing in 3 turns; city 2 has 1 pop, growing in 1 turn. Capital in F has 3 pop, growth was stopped as soon as it reached 3 pop to produce settler, and settler still needs 2 turns. So in 3 turns B has a 3 pop capital and 2 pop city 2, F has a 3 pop capital (with 1 turn of growth ahead of B) and no city 2 yet.

- City 2 set up in B with its fish improved, not in F. In F, capital needs 2 turns to produce settler, then can finish workboat. In B both our cities can produce whatever we want next, F has a few turns to catch up in setting up city 2.
- Also related to production: worker in F just finished a chop, worker in B is one turn away from chopping.

(Another minor point because we are not running out of forests anytime soon, but notice how the same amount of forest is left in the capital work area in both cases. In B, city 2 placement destroyed a forest (I missed the chance to chop it first), and then 1 forest was chopped just west of city 2 on that hill for the workboat.)

- Research and gold situation: That was detailed in my post above, but in summary:
F: 13 research per turn, 0 gold change, 27 gold in bank, 163/162 sailing (so sailing finished with 1 point overflow).
B: 16 research per turn, -1 gold change, 19 gold in bank, 155/162 sailing. On the on the next turn it becomes 18 research / turn with sailing.
As mentioned before, F is 8 research points and 8 gold ahead (16 total commerce); but until F settles its second city and works that fish, B is now making 2 more per turn (+3 research, -1 gold), becoming 4 more per turn until sailing. In 3 turns (2+4+4 = 10) B will only be 6 total commerce behind, or about 1/3 of a turn worth of research, while several turns ahead in growth and production.

Of course this is not the only possible outcome of each strategy. Maybe @sampsa was actually ahead of my B save. And maybe you can produce a better position in a fishing first save.

 

[Gumbolt]

The only save TP posted was a 975bc save where he had 2 workers and a third worker near completed in his capital with only one city. He was roading towards his next city as he had barely chopped any forest. He had skipped pottery too. Why would you skip pottery when granary is the most important building in the game for growth? He was not working his best city tiles either. Rejected a 2f3H mine for a 1f3h mine is not good.

At some point TP needs to accept the advice from better players like Sampsa. You 100% don't understand the game better than him. If you want to play beyond T32 and post saves and embrace the debate great. What you are currently doing is not really adding any value. Not sure if this is because you don't want to or can't match the micro of what others have done so far. You need to back up your debate with facts. At present you are failing to do this.You don't just turn up one day and tell the world this method is better because I say so. If you had demonstrated you were one of the best players in the world then fair enough. Having viewed your posts over last 3 years this is not the case.

OP needs to consider the snowball effect. Small little advantages early on lead to big advantages later on. Difference betwenn okay players and better players comes down to micro and knowledge of the game. The better players will have stronger economies and will expand faster and their worker micro will be better as they know which worker actions add more value early on. Chopping/improving resources is the most useful action a worker should be doing early. Roads and mines worst. This has been play tested over millions of hours by the community. Roading forest just loses a worker turns and adds no hammer or food value to help a city. Where chopping adds 20H. Mining pigs adds a 2F3H tile. It's all about investment of actions vs reward. Chopping 5-6 forest will give you 1-2 workers or a settler. Mining /roading tiles may add nothing if the tiles are not being worked. Another reason why cities are often built closer together.

Should this thread be closed off? It's an interesting game if you want an unbalanced GLH game due to the map script. As long as you spam 10-15 or so cities by 1ad the game should be won. AI are not good on forest map as the AI does not chop forest enough. Cities can't grow on 1F forest tiles.

 

[Fippy]

Early game i use pre-chop when workers arrive at city spots before settlers, for fast workboat or granary

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Should this thread be closed off?

I think so, there's lots of valuable tips here to take people's games up a level so worthwhile from that perspective - thanks to everyone who contributed to the discussion.

Moderator Action: Thread closed --NZ